Good Monday morning! Welcome to what the White House is calling energy week. Every week is energy week in our world, but Ben has more on the Trump administration's plans in today's newsletter.
Meanwhile, my latest Harder Line column reports on the trend of shareholders increasingly pressuring fossil-fuel companies on climate change risk, and some related analysis not yet made public by the nonprofit group Ceres.
Check it out below, and then I'm going to hand the reins back to Ben as usual.
Efforts by shareholders to push resolutions on the risk related to carbon regulations are reaching a tipping point, with almost half of investors in fossil-fuel and utility companies backing resolutions, according to a new analysis by nonprofit group Ceres not yet published publicly. Activist shareholders of publicly traded companies have been pushing resolutions on climate change for years and now the effort is going mainstream with new support from institutional investors.
Why it matters: With the U.S. government retreating on climate policy under the leadership of President Trump, corporate America is emerging as the central battleground. The increased support for climate-related resolutions show that mainstream investors are taking the issue more seriously than ever despite Trump.
Read the rest of the Harder Line here.
It's "energy week" at the White House, the latest of the administration's themed messaging weeks.
A word you'll hear a lot: A major emphasis will be achieving U.S. energy "dominance," according to a White House official.
Big picture: Trump will emphasize that the U.S. is "on the brink of becoming a net exporter of oil, gas, coal and other energy resources," via Bloomberg.
Quick take: Trumpworld's frequent use of "dominant" creates a rationale for easing rules and making more lands and waters available for drilling. They need a big word, because U.S. oil and natural gas production already surged under Obama, reaching records in gas and near-records in oil.
How it will unfold, according to the official . . .
It emphasizes the context around the instantly famous tweet by CEO Lloyd Blankfein that attacked Trump's decision (opposed by Cohn and Powell) to abandon the Paris climate deal, underscoring how it's about broader corporate positioning vis a vis Trump.
Key passage: "The crucial question confronting Cohn, Mnuchin, and Powell—whether they choose to acknowledge it or not—is if their association with Trump and his administration will forever tarnish the reputations they have worked so hard to build, mostly by affiliation with Goldman Sachs. And given how closely the three Goldman partners have come to be linked with Trump, it might not be great for Goldman either—a fact that Blankfein seems to have intuited."